Chelsea Transfers

[NikkiCFC 7,625]

I don't even trust him with ages. 

Look at his photos from youth, he always looked 5 years older than anyone else. I watched him live when he was 17. 

The fucker could be 33/34.

[DH1988 1,200]

6 minutes ago, NikkiCFC said:

I don't even trust him with ages. 

Look at his photos from youth, he always looked 5 years older than anyone else. I watched him live when he was 17. 

The fucker could be 33/34.

100% I have always said this. It’s not uncommon either, where I played football as a kid this was frequently done to get kids into academies against a younger age group.

[King Kante 1,340]

2 hours ago, Tomo said:

With Baka, he would have either ran Cesc or Kante to the ground (which he ended up doing once he finally gave up on him) or put Luiz there to prove a point. Conte was playing chicken the entire season to the point he borderline started throwing games and we're suppose to believe he would have persisted with a player barely doing the basics right had he been signed against his will? It just doesn't add up, in reality he would have exhausted literally every option possible before turning to him.

With Morata, false 9 until Oli arrived.

For me it is pretty clear that the board since around 2007 have had a policy of scouting/picking the players with the manager getting one pick (maybe two at times), and particularly post 2012. An example of this would be Jorgi for Sarri, Chilwell for Lampard, Torres for Ancellotti, Robinho (failed) for Scolari, Costa for Jose (Cesc may have been a pick but not sure as Jose hasn't ever really gone for many Cesc type players.) AVB's I think was meant to be Rodriguez (or whoever that FB from Porto was that we didn't get.) 

Additionally, I see no real change in transfer strategy from pre-Conte to Conte's regin to post-Conte (bar last Summer which was kind of like 03-06 again) if you look at the age demographics of the players.

If you scan the period from 2012-18 we seemed to have a policy of primarily using funds for players u26, then adding the odd experienced player via buyout/gentleman's agreement (Luiz, Cesc, Pedro) or using a loan/emerangy buy when desperate (Giroud, Pato, Higuain.)

Personally, I really don't see the majority of the signings under Conte as being any different to what went before and after. It was more that the players brought were just bad and he was a lighting rod because of how he carried on in his second season.

I mean the season before Conte we went on a spree to buy Baba, Hector, Papy and Pedro (the buyout/gentleman's agreement buy) with loans for Falcao and Pato then after he left, we went to buy the biggest dud of all in Kepa. 

The idea that 2017 was all on Conte doesn't really wash with me as we were still making disastrous decisions either side of him. I mean, lets's be real, if we go out and buy Lukaku at 28 for £100m, when he clearly doesn't fit the managers style of play (the irony of doing this now when Conte clearly wanted him in 2017 is not lost), how is the strategy been different in anyway?

Some people point to players coming from Italy, but their are numerous examples of us buying from one location at points - Belgium 2012, Spain 2015-2016, France 2016-18 (think we brought just as many players from France as Italy during Conte's time) etc. 

If people want to complain about how Conte behaved in his second season, I don't really mind (as whilst I have sympathy for him in that the club weren't providing him with the players he wanted) he did give up and appeared to behaving in a manner to get himself sacked to get his payout.

[MoroccanBlue 5,219]

31 minutes ago, Tomo said:

And it will substantially weaken us in big games and probably see to a UCL defense unless Tuchel has the balls to drop him.

This could very well be the signing that gets Tuchel sacked. 

[whats happening 1,440]

36 minutes ago, We Hate Scouse said:

What if...

Chelsea have leaked the Lukaku story to instill fear in Dortmund that we're ready to walk away from our negotiations and they will have to settle for half of what they could've had, thus forcing their hand to accept. 🤔

dortmund board is stupid, they dont care.

[King Kante 1,340]

27 minutes ago, Jas said:

Would like to think that Dortmund have assessed all the possible scenarios and if they really aren't gonna budge, then I don't think they care what we do. 

Indeed, I can't see someone from Dortmund running into their boardroom, phone in hand with Law's article, shouting "sell, sell, sell..........you never guess what Chelsea are about to do if we don't budge! Their going to call our bluff and buy Lukaku for £100m! 😨😨😨😨😨"

[Blue Armour 4,176]

1 hour ago, Tomo said:

And this is exactly why i have been screaming  from the rooftop for weeks now to wait it out if we can't find the right fit.

Unless we sign an inexpensive nobody, like Kalajdzic.

Definitely not a Lukaku or Kane.

[King Kante 1,340]

27 minutes ago, NikkiCFC said:

I don't even trust him with ages. 

Look at his photos from youth, he always looked 5 years older than anyone else. I watched him live when he was 17. 

The fucker could be 33/34.

He does look older than he is, but he was born in Belgium so faking his age is a lot harder to do than in some other countries. 

[NikkiCFC 7,625]

Announce Hulk. 

[Blue Armour 4,176]

The one thing that bothers me about the club sniffing around for Lukaku, is whether this is actually a Tuchel backed target.

Is this another 'board knows what's best? 

We bring on a player that wasn't really wanted, and he becomes the elephant in the dressing room. 

[whats happening 1,440]

i just dont get it. our board is ready to give 100 million euros for lukaku + his wages + agent, but are not ready to give 150-180 for haaland + his wages + agents. since two (or three) of our offers have been recejted by inter it seems like they gave up on haaland, which also means they probably think that selling our not-needed players will not be happening either.

[Blue Armour 4,176]

Hope the club doesn't try to woo Lukaku by launching some awful campaign about 'unfinished business'.

He has no unfinished business.

He took his ball and left for Everton.

[Tomo 21,685]

3 minutes ago, King Kante said:

For me it is pretty clear that the board since around 2007 have had a policy of scouting/picking the players with the manager getting one pick (maybe two at times), and particularly post 2012. An example of this would be Jorgi for Sarri, Chilwell for Lampard, Torres for Ancellotti, Robinho (failed) for Scolari, Costa for Jose (Cesc may have been a pick but not sure as Jose hasn't ever really gone for many Cesc type players.) AVB's I think was meant to be Rodriguez (or whoever that FB from Porto was that we didn't get.) 

Additionally, I see no real change in transfer strategy from pre-Conte to Conte's regin to post-Conte (bar last Summer which was kind of like 03-06 again) if you look at the age demographics of the players.

If you scan the period from 2012-18 we seemed to have a policy of primarily using funds for players u26, then adding the odd experienced player via buyout/gentleman's agreement (Luiz, Cesc, Pedro) or using a loan/emerangy buy when desperate (Giroud, Pato, Higuain.)

Personally, I really don't see the majority of the signings under Conte as being any different to what went before and after. It was more that the players brought were just bad and he was a lighting rod because of how he carried on in his second season.

I mean the season before Conte we went on a spree to buy Baba, Hector, Papy and Pedro (the buyout/gentleman's agreement buy) with loans for Falcao and Pato then after he left, we went to buy the biggest dud of all in Kepa. 

The idea that 2017 was all on Conte doesn't really wash with me as we were still making disastrous decisions either side of him. I mean, lets's be real, if we go out and buy Lukaku at 28 for £100m, when he clearly doesn't fit the managers style of play (the irony of doing this now when Conte clearly wanted him in 2017 is not lost), how is the strategy been different in anyway?

Some people point to players coming from Italy, but their are numerous examples of us buying from one location at points - Belgium 2012, Spain 2015-2016, France 2016-18 (think we brought just as many players from France as Italy during Conte's time) etc. 

If people want to complain about how Conte behaved in his second season, I don't really mind (as whilst I have sympathy for him in that the club weren't providing him with the players he wanted) he did give up and appeared to behaving in a manner to get himself sacked to get his payout.

Apart from Kepa our signing's have been largely good since 2018  (i'm convinced all our 2020 signings will come good), even Higuain served a purpose, although admittedly that would take a hit if Lukaku returns. Not only that Conte himself has largely stuck to a similar profile of signings at Inter which included trying to reunite with two of our singing's from that year. Conte has been known to be pretty sketchy in the market, United fans still joke about him being a key part of their rebuild by taking Young and Alexis (both of whom he also wanted here) off their hands.

Do i think Conte was the only guilty party for that season? No but i also don't buy him being an innocent bystander either.

[Pizy 17,863]

One positive thing we probably could count on with Lukaku is him bullying the shit out of Arsenal a couple of times each season. That’ll be funny, I guess. 😂

[DDA 9,570]

Nah just watched highlights of Lukaku and it has reminded me that indeed the fella is a complete donkey at times. 

 

[Tomo 21,685]

-

Edited August 3, 2021 by Tomo

[Tomo 21,685]

 

 

[Milan 17,835]

In this particular instance, can we revert back to 'Waiting FC', or 'Monitoring FC' or whatever was used in this forum before? Just one big no to this signing!